LENIN COLLECTION.
Petersburg). There he is arrested and placed in the "famous" Nikolaev detention companies, from which on October 10, 1905 he escapes, but unsuccessfully. Subsequently he is released by the Manifesto of October 17. Vilonov again works continuously in Samara, Moscow. In October 1908, comrade Vilonov goes abroad. There he works on a philosophical book, which, however, he does not manage to finish, and simultaneously works energetically on the organization of a party school (on Capri). Excerpts from his report on the school are published in "Proletarii," No. 47—48 for 1909 (see more details in "Social-Democrat," No. 14 of July 22/5, 1910, and also in the present collection p. 423 "Milestones in the Life of Vladimir Ilyich" 1909, pt. 2.

2) This concerns the Faction of the Recallists-Ultimatists (Forward-ists).

V. I. LENIN — A. M. GORKY.

Letter No. 46.

Dear A. M.!

Regarding your arrival — that is unnecessary on your part. Well, why should I quarrel with Maximov — Bogdanov, Lunacharsky, and so forth? You yourselves write: you squabble among yourselves — and you call us to squabble before the people. That is not the model. And regarding pushing away workers, that too is unnecessary. Well, if they accept our invitation and come to us, — we shall have a good chat with them, we shall do battle over the views of one newspaper, which some Factioneers have been scolding for a long time (I have heard this from Lyadov and others) as the most tedious, poorly literate, needed by no one, not believing in the proletariat and socialism *).

Regarding the new split2) your formulation is not quite right. On the one hand, both are nihilists (and "Slavic anarchists" — ah, my friend, but the non-Slavic Europeans in times like ours fought, scolded each other and split a hundred times more cleanly!) — and on the other hand, the split will be no less profound than between the Bolsheviks and Mensheviks. If the matter is the "nihilism" of the "squabblers," the poor literacy and so forth of some who do not believe in what they write, and so on — then, that means, the split is not profound, and is not even a split. And if the split is deeper than between Bolsheviks and Mensheviks, — then the matter is not in nihilism and not in writers who do not believe in their own writings. Your formulation is not quite right, truly! You are mistaken regarding the present split

LENIN. --- LETTERS TO GORKY.

and you say rightly *) "I understand the people, but I do not understand their deeds."

What appears to you and Maximov [Bogdanov] as insincerity and worthlessness, and so forth in "Proletarii," is explained by quite a different point of view on the entire contemporary moment and on Marxism, of course. We have been, so to speak, marking time for two years, chewing over those questions which still seem "debatable" to Maximov—Bogdanov, which life decided long ago. And if we continued to "dispute" about them, we would still be marking time in vain. But having parted ways, we shall show the workers clearly, directly, definitively two courses. The workers social-democrats will choose easily and quickly, because the tactic of preserving (in cans) the revolutionary words of 1905—1906 instead of applying the revolutionary method to the new, different situation, to the changed epoch, demanding other methods and other forms of organization, — this is a dead tactic. The proletariat goes and will come to revolution, — but not as before 1905: to those who "believe" that it goes and will come, but do not understand this "not as before," — to them our position must seem insincere, worthless, tedious, based on disbelief in the proletariat and socialism, and so forth, and so forth. The divergence flowing from this is, undoubtedly, sufficiently profound to make the split — at least the one abroad — inevitable. But it is nowhere near as profound as the split between Bolsheviks and Mensheviks, if we speak of the depth of the split of the party, the social-democrats, the Marxists.

You are amazed that I do not see the hysteria, the indiscipline (it is not for you to speak, not for Mikhail to listen) and other vices of Mikhail. Well, I had the chance to verify this in a small matter: I thought that a conversation with you would not work out, that there was nothing to write. Under the impression of a conversation with Mikhail I wrote at once, on the spur of the moment, without even rereading the letter, without putting it off until tomorrow. The next day I think: I was foolish, I believed Mikhail. But it turned out that, however much Mikhail gets carried away, inasmuch as his character showed itself, because a conversation with you did after all take place, — not without its rough spots, of course, not without the demolition of "Proletarii," well, but what can one do about it!

I shake your hand firmly. N. Lenin.

1) This refers to the newspaper "Proletarii," which Gorky in his reply to Vladimir Ilyich's previous letter characterized with the words cited by Lenin.

2) Here and further this concerns the split between the "Leninists" and the "Forward-ists," led by A. A. Bogdanov.